|
Post by blackforest on Nov 24, 2023 5:02:19 GMT
Well, it depends on one's vantage point. If one likes the direction that the Church has taken during the pontificate of Francis, then you're not going to like Strickland. If one has reservations about that direction, then you are going to like Strickland. My concern is that framing this discussion in terms of personal preference ("like" vs. "not like") we're overlooking an overarching objective truth - namely, that Strickland's sedavacantism is objectively wrong. Indeed, I half wonder if that Letter, read in public with his enthusiastic endorsement, referenced in the article isn't what got him in this pickle in the first place. From the Letter, referencing Pope Francis:
Excuse me???
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 24, 2023 5:48:11 GMT
Well, it depends on one's vantage point. If one likes the direction that the Church has taken during the pontificate of Francis, then you're not going to like Strickland. If one has reservations about that direction, then you are going to like Strickland. My concern is that framing this discussion in terms of personal preference ("like" vs. "not like") we're overlooking an overarching objective truth - namely, that Strickland's sedavacantism is objectively wrong. Indeed, I half wonder if that Letter, read in public with his enthusiastic endorsement, referenced in the article isn't what got him in this pickle in the first place. But that wouldn't fall under the rubric of "administration". ViganĂ² drops hints all the time that he doubts Francis is a true Pope, but then again he is not the bishop of a diocese with a body of faithful who are his ecclesiastical subjects (or whatever the word would be). But no, even hinting at sede vacante isn't something a bishop should do if he wants to keep his diocese.
|
|
|
Post by tisbearself on Nov 24, 2023 14:49:03 GMT
Strickland doesn't seem to be much of a sedevacantist when his first act after getting the boot was to post on his social media that all of his followers should stay in the Church. I had kind of wondered if he would go off to the SSPX, and I know there's a legit debate as to whether SSPX are in communion with the Church and whether Pope Francis likes them, although my personal opinion is that they're schismatic and the Pope probably doesn't like them that much and just puts on a good show. But it really seems like Strickland isn't leaving the Church. Having said that, I agree that questioning the authority of the chief-in-charge was the proverbial waving of a red flag at a (papal) bull. Maybe he wanted to get fired for his own strategic reasons. Who knows.
|
|
|
Post by blackforest on Nov 24, 2023 16:19:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Nov 24, 2023 19:37:25 GMT
Yes, and it was quite imprudent for him to read that letter. When I think of a true "liberal" (and not in the 19th-century Chestertonian sense), I think of someone --- let's say Phil Donahue or Alan Alda (probably dating myself here) --- who would want to hear all points of view, acknowledge why that person holds those points of view, and even empathize without necessarily agreeing. I am pretty much like that myself. If someone tells me that the earth is flat, or that we never went to the moon, or that all Popes since [insert name here] have not truly been Popes, I'd say something like "you must have some pretty good reasons for thinking that, here, sit down with me and have your say, let's talk, persuade me, no one has all the answers, I know I certainly don't". Others who come to mind, who have approached issues in that fashion, are Oprah Winfrey or David Frost. I'm not sure Francis is of that mindset or temperament. He might consider cultivating it. That would be true liberalism, true "synodality".
|
|
|
Post by blackforest on Nov 26, 2023 4:55:21 GMT
I agree that he went too far. The strategy may be to read the letter so as not to admit overtly that those sentiments were as much his as the letter-writer. But the way he condoned the letter-writer . . . it was obvious. I really appreciate your level-headed take on this ordeal.
|
|